Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

refactor!: remove some legacy amino stuff needed for #11275 #15299

Merged
merged 18 commits into from
Mar 15, 2023
Merged

refactor!: remove some legacy amino stuff needed for #11275 #15299

merged 18 commits into from
Mar 15, 2023

Conversation

aaronc
Copy link
Member

@aaronc aaronc commented Mar 7, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Description

Ref: #11275

While doing #15284, I removed a bunch of legacy amino StdTx stuff that (I'm pretty sure) is no longer needed and that will be hard to support with the approach in #11275. I pulled those changes into this PR so that reviews are easier. It would be good if reviewers can confirm that nothing essential is removed in this PR. This PR should not remove any amino JSON signing functionality that is currently in use, but rather StdTx stuff that as far as I know hasn't been used in years.

Author Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and
please add links to any relevant follow up issues.

I have...

  • included the correct type prefix in the PR title
  • added ! to the type prefix if API or client breaking change
  • targeted the correct branch (see PR Targeting)
  • provided a link to the relevant issue or specification
  • followed the guidelines for building modules
  • included the necessary unit and integration tests
  • added a changelog entry to CHANGELOG.md
  • included comments for documenting Go code
  • updated the relevant documentation or specification
  • reviewed "Files changed" and left comments if necessary
  • confirmed all CI checks have passed

Reviewers Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note if the item is not applicable and please add
your handle next to the items reviewed if you only reviewed selected items.

I have...

  • confirmed the correct type prefix in the PR title
  • confirmed ! in the type prefix if API or client breaking change
  • confirmed all author checklist items have been addressed
  • reviewed state machine logic
  • reviewed API design and naming
  • reviewed documentation is accurate
  • reviewed tests and test coverage
  • manually tested (if applicable)

@aaronc aaronc marked this pull request as ready for review March 7, 2023 21:03
@aaronc aaronc requested a review from a team as a code owner March 7, 2023 21:03
@aaronc aaronc requested a review from alexanderbez March 7, 2023 21:06
@github-prbot github-prbot requested review from a team and amaury1093 and removed request for a team March 7, 2023 21:13
amaury1093
amaury1093 reviewed Mar 8, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@amaury1093 amaury1093 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If we can remove StdTx altogether, that would make me happy

x/auth/migrations/legacytx/stdtx.go Show resolved Hide resolved
x/auth/types/codec.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@aaronc
Copy link
Member Author

aaronc commented Mar 13, 2023

Can I get another review of this?

facundomedica
facundomedica reviewed Mar 14, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@facundomedica facundomedica left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, but e2e tests are failing because they use some stuff deleted here

alexanderbez
alexanderbez approved these changes Mar 14, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@alexanderbez alexanderbez left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Love to see code deletion

@aaronc
Copy link
Member Author

aaronc commented Mar 14, 2023

Are we okay removing these e2e tests? They are for services we do support (amino <-> proto conversion), but using code we want to delete. Hopefully the need for these conversions endpoints has a limited lifespan...

@aaronc aaronc mentioned this pull request Mar 14, 2023
Merged
19 tasks
@aaronc
Copy link
Member Author

aaronc commented Mar 14, 2023

Are we okay removing these e2e tests? They are for services we do support (amino <-> proto conversion), but using code we want to delete. Hopefully the need for these conversions endpoints has a limited lifespan...

This is being addressed in #15397 which we should merge first

tac0turtle
tac0turtle reviewed Mar 14, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@tac0turtle tac0turtle left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Left one question, we should create a follow up issue to cleanup any docs related to this

x/auth/client/cli/tx_sign.go
@@ -19,7 +19,6 @@ const (
flagMultisig = "multisig"
flagOverwrite = "overwrite"
flagSigOnly = "signature-only"
flagAmino = "amino"
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Does this effect ledger signing via cli?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think so. I think it's for generating a StdTx which is no longer needed, but it would be great if someone else can confirm

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

See lines 422-439 deleted below - that generates a StdTx. I'm not sure where one would submit that except to a legacy chain. If so, they should have a legacy binary to do that. So I think safe to remove

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@alexanderbez does that seem right to you?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Imo we should add a small cli breaking change in changelog for that.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Added changelog entries

@aaronc aaronc enabled auto-merge (squash) March 15, 2023 14:31
@aaronc aaronc disabled auto-merge March 15, 2023 14:41
@aaronc aaronc enabled auto-merge (squash) March 15, 2023 15:07
@julienrbrt julienrbrt added the A:automerge Automatically merge PR once all prerequisites pass. label Mar 15, 2023
@aaronc aaronc merged commit ecc685d into main Mar 15, 2023
@aaronc aaronc deleted the aaronc/11275-amino-cleanup branch March 15, 2023 20:10
@faddat faddat mentioned this pull request Mar 28, 2023
Closed
19 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@tac0turtle tac0turtle tac0turtle left review comments

@julienrbrt julienrbrt julienrbrt left review comments

@amaury1093 amaury1093 amaury1093 approved these changes

@alexanderbez alexanderbez alexanderbez approved these changes

@facundomedica facundomedica facundomedica approved these changes

Assignees

@amaury1093 amaury1093

@facundomedica facundomedica

@testinginprod testinginprod

Labels
A:automerge Automatically merge PR once all prerequisites pass. C:CLI C:x/auth
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
7 participants
@aaronc @amaury1093 @alexanderbez @facundomedica @tac0turtle @julienrbrt @testinginprod